Congressional "Draft Picks"

It is something of old stale news in the blogosphere, but I thought I would comment on Representative Charles Rangel's motion to reinstate the draft. This motion is interesting as it in some ways acts as a microcosm on the debates and politics of the day.

First of all, as blogger-journalist Howard Kurtz notes, this motion and the speed with which other Democratic congressional leaders have distanced themselves from it is somewhat indicative of the larger lack of direction or unity among Democrats. The fact that any such motion would be soundly voted down by members of both parties also points to how much reinstating a military draft would be like voting on Social Security. Another interesting relfection on modern politics is how, from what I can gather, Rangel's draft motion is not really a serious idea anyway, but either some attempt at political showmanship or some vague poetic justice That Congressmen wouldn't vote for wars if their children had to serve, although a.) this did not stop them from approving World War II and Vietnam and b.) it's a bit of an open question how many Congressmen have draft-age children anyway, and ignores that draft or no draft being a Congressman's son or daughter means you're never going to a foxhole unless you want to.

That fellow Democrat Rahm Emanuel has countered with a plan for compulsory national service (whether in the military or some - mandatory?- volunteer duties) shows that this debate is more about some sense of "values" and might lead to a political compromise similar to Germany's conscription: one year of compulsory military service that can be earned in volunteer charity work. I met a German student once who fulfilled this requirement by working in a nursing home. Should I point out that Germany has a large problem even mounting peacekeeping operations? Such "national service" seems like a bigger waste of time and energy than just a straightforward military draft.

Kurtz's survery of internet opinion also shows that the draft is a concept now completely foreign to large portions of American society. Some decry it as two years of slavery, a writer from the National Review opposes it on the notion that the volunteer army does not need it. All, bloggers, journalists and politicians, overlook the fact that the United States technically does have a draft, called the Selective Service that is there to be mobilized after the full-time units, individual and unit reserves and National Guard have been mobilized. But, let's be honest, Selective Service is something of a joke at best, and will never seriously contribute to military command. Also, in theory, is the US military supposed to be manned and equipped to fight two medium conventional wars at once, but this also seems to be something of pie in the sky. So much for objectives, and the political will to meet those objectives without meddling in micromanaging the details.

Jim Webb, Senator-elect from Virginia, wrote an article on why reinstating the draft would be a good idea. It can be found freely viewable here, and I should point out it was written in 1980, before he was even Secretary of the Navy. If he still believes half of the things he writes here (such as women being unfit for combat duty, the silliness of a volunteer army's advertising and "seducing" of potential volunteers, the ease that volunteers can quit and the downright necessity for strengthening military discipline), then he cannot be too popular with Nancy Pelosi or Howard Dean. But nevertheless his views seem even more relevant today, and it is a hopeful thought that he could sway more people from his party. Perhaps the military does not need a draft, but Webb seems right that American society could use one.

I sincerely hope that we will have more political leaders like Webb and like McCain (who broke political protocol by stating things like they are - that troops levels need to be raised in Iraq before anything else, as requested by Gen. Abizaid among others). These Navy vet senators seem to have a better grasp on ideas and the relative importance of what needs to be done.

Influential Americans

No magazine, it seems, can resist putting out a "greatest 100" list. You might remember an excess of these from the build-up to the year 2000 (how long ago that seems!).

In any case, the Atlantic Monthly has put out its own 100 list, and admits openly that it is an attempt to work up historical discussion more than anything else. They polled noted American historians on who has had the greatest influence or impact on American history, and the top 100 figures (ie, those receiving the most votes) are included on the list here. The list can be viewed without a login and password, and the analysis here (which requires a login...you can ask me for it).

The editors note that the list is interesting in that it is very traditional: Founding Fathers, Captains of Industry and Great Inventors rank high, and the overwhelming majority of figures are native-born Northeastern men of European ancestry involved in law or politics. Also, there is a lack of collaborators in favor of singular figures. There are, of course, exceptions to these tendencies (eg. Martin Luther King at 8, Susan B. Anthony and Rachel Carson at 38 and 39). A prejudice is made against the contemporary, for who knows how their achievements will stand over time, as well as those who are popular or are celebrities (fame is fleeting). A bias is made in favor of the fundamental and those who have the widest impact (as opposed to being on the list to just represent a special interest). But still, the argument is raised: is Walt Disney really that important? Have no American Indians influenced American history? The article points out that the list gets more interesting after the first 100, where such figures appear as George Lucas, Julia Child, Nikola Tesla and Willis Carrier, inventor of the air-conditioner, without which the Southern half of the United States would be an underpopulated, hot and humid backwater.

An interesting and worthy topic for debate, in any case. Feel free to read the list and use it for conversation topics this Thanksgiving weekend.

While I've Been Away...

I was once told by a professor of mine that people who leave their home country for two years never quite fit in again in their home country. They can be natives who have followed domestic happenings while they were abroad, but there will always be the little things that they just do not get.

Well, I was away from the US for two and a half years, and have only been back for five months or so. Besides the face-on culture shock of moving back to America (I still often feel like an immigrant), there are myriad things that I just "don't get". Here is a Top Ten List (a la David Letterman...if he even still does this...)

10. Christmas now begins before Halloween. Need I say more?

09. Hats. I remember back in school, if you wore a baseball cap, the rim needed to be broken in to be "cool". Then people began wearing baseball hats backwards. Then sideways. Now the cap must be worn facing frontwards, but on an off-angle of about 45 degrees. And the rim should be cardboard-straight. I and some other volunteers first noticed this one running into student travellers in Thailand, and we knew American culture had begun to pass us by. Where did this one come from?

08. Elastic bands are now a fashion item to be worn on the wrist. I have seen this one, and I really do not understand it at all.

07. Television. It is even worse than it used to be. And I just am not even bothering to get back into the loop. What the hell is "Lost"? Its like a scripted Survivor or something? Whatever...

06. Pop-tarts. All of 'em. How is Britney Spears still popular? I know a lot of it is morbid curiousity, but still, she's younger than me and already looks 15 years older than she is. Granted she had two kids, but she's also a millionaire. And just why do people pay attention to Paris Hilton????

05. Internet society. Yes, I am being a little hypocritical as I am writing on a blog, but still. I see many younger coworkers of mine writing on Facebook and MySpace and YouTube and whatever other combined-word-name websites are out there. And I don't get it.

04. Organic food is now everywhere, and it basically just means its the same old food but at more expensive prices. There do seem to be a lot more farmers' markets, and that is the one good unknown that I've encountered on my return to the States.

03. iPods. I know that people had them in 2004 before I left, but really, it has become a new staple good. I guess its better than people playing their cellphone ringtones for entertainment, as is common in Asia. But still, what is up with people's newfound worship of Apple?

02. Another fashion unknown to me: Men's hairstyles. What is with guys styling cowlicks into their hair? You know what I mean: the hair sticking up on the front of men's heads. It seems like this is the new power-cut for men, the more "relaxed" style being the 70's-esque jock overgrown mop. Someone just needs to call in the Paris Island barbers, please...

01. Politics. No, even though I keep up on it, American politics still baffles me. Why are people now all of a sudden tired of Iraq? What makes it more of a disaster now than in 2003-2004 (granted its not much better, but to be fair it's not that much worse). I said it before, I'll say it again: if Americans are tired of the war now, then they shouldn't have supported it in 2002-2003 and then reelected Bush. You made your international obligations, deal with them. I find it insane that the political world has pulled a complete reverse: Thomas Friedman and Fareed Zakaria, who supported Bush and introducing democracy into Iraq now say its a bad idea that won't get anywhere, and Paul Krugman who once so decried the future bankruptcy of Social Security wrote vehemently in 2005 about the lack of a need to reform it. Apparently people went from being gung-ho pro-Bush in 2001-04 to being anti-Bush since then. Where does this all come from? And speaking of politics and society, why does it seem now that everyone in America either speaks Spanish or hates people who speak Spanish?


Number one wasn't much of a Letterman punchline, so here we go: Boston Teams have won championships in their respective leagues. Wow.